“I made an operating system UI within Unity”
old.reddit.com
old.reddit.com
I had that new-job-gotta-impress energy, so went _hard_ at this project. I added so many tiny details to make it _exactly like the windows mobile device_. I had simulated battery indicators, signal that was calculated by ray-crawling to the nearest in game "tower" and attenuating based on the materials it encountered along the way (why?!) -- every menu, function, submenu that I had access to I implemented. The power button worked, the restart button would do the windows mobile boot animation. No stone unturned.
When I finished it, I assume 6 people saw it, but they never said anything to me about it. That was probably my first adulthood jolt of ennui. Ah memories.
We spent years building what amounted to UML diagrams of existing Army units. Great effort went into them. Coordination with active-duty officers, with GS civilian stakeholders, training from certified DoDAF-training instructors; we had TS-SCI clearances.
Then the resulting products went into a database somewhere, and nobody ever looked at them.
I imagine that sort of thing is rife in the government contracting world, but it seems like that particular firm has a real knack for finding truly futile things to get paid for.
I did find a few things I could do that made an impact. One project I did on a lark even resulted in a little recognition.
I overheard an instructor complaining about an onerous, all hands on deck eternal data wrangling task. Seemed like an easy thing to automate. For bureaucracy dodging reasons, I wrote it in actionscript3. All it did was eat files and spit out xslx files.
Turns out it wiped out XX% of the manual labor every instructor on post had to do in a single button press.
A GS megaboss said it was going to save the government millions of dollars a year. Was a little disappointed I never personally got a challenge coin for it. My boss did :)
I'm grateful for the numbers though, I could leave that job confident I saved the tax payer more than I cost.
Hopefully some of the things I'm working on for my current employer will get some visibility in the outside world. Software is ephemera, but I'd like to make a token effort to be remembered.
What sucks is if it was half-assed when you finally do find it. Or worse, it gets forgotten about and the work gets duplicated every time someone needs that info.
I call it Schrodinger's work. Maybe it matters to someone, maybe it doesn't. You don't know until you do it. The stuff you spend a month on winds up being worthless and the stuff that you spend an hour on winds up being used everywhere. There's no telling which is which. Such is life creating support documentation for systems that live and die by things outside your team's control.
https://i.imgur.com/2nagJS4.png
I did implement graphics hardware as well, so in theory you could write a GUI along the lines of Contiki or something
https://i.imgur.com/DmnVA2I.png
The hard drives were configurable (up to 4MB hard drive images supported) and as per the pic above, the light on the drives light up when accessing the disk.
ANSI/VT100 support on the terminal as well:
https://i.imgur.com/DlftREp.png
Telnet+ZMODEM client was working so you could download software directly from Internet connected BBS's:
https://i.imgur.com/K44GT1W.png
Or do word processing in space with WordStar 4:
https://i.imgur.com/rIY1he8.png
I wanted to make something a bit between a cross between FTL and 0x10C, but in 3D, and where your space controls were linked up to software running on the Z80. I had up to four Z80 instances running (could have supported more), and wanted to be able to network them to each other as well as the spaceship control plane as well.
Also - the ANSI graphics example... it honestly looks bitmapped, not like a bunch of colored character cells. But then the graphics example (link 2) also looks bitmapped, so I think I'm missing something.
https://16colo.rs/pack/blocktronics_16colors/k1-shack.ans
Colors are a little off in retrospect, not sure whether I ever fixed that. The screen on the left shows the bitmap graphics mode with the alien from Alien: Covenant.
I should upload it somewhere for people to play with and give feedback. The UE4 project build is about 1GB, I have to search around on my hard drive to find where the hell I put the Z80 floppy/hard disk images to boot the Z80 VM's though. They contained some fun stuff, like a working port of Rogue, the Infocom Zork games, a C compiler etc.
The screenshots you've posted definitely look interesting to poke around with. Do the keys press as you type? :D
1GB is sizable but not too out of reach for those interested. Sounds like there are a lot of assets/interesting stuff elsewhere in the project?
I wondered about a good "somewhere" to put it online for a bit - I don't have a good answer for this. I checked itch.io, which apparently has a 500MB limit that can be expanded to 2GB on request. (https://itch.io/t/324861/need-help-with-size-limit-on-game-u..., https://itch.io/t/46291/uploading-large-games-faq). Archive.org would probably work, despite the most likely reaction being at least one raised eyebrow.
(And... hm, user-specifiable disk images are probably something you've already thought of.)
No, it's not. That ANSI image on the right is rendered in-engine via the VT100 component of the Z80 computer, which I wrote from scratch. You can take the .ans file from the 16 colors website (which is what I did) and dump it to the terminal and that's how I got that screenshot.
Getting it to look right means not only emulating the ANSI color codes, but implementing the IBM CP437 character set. CP/M purists would attack me with a pointed stick, since only the IBM PC had that character set by default, and it would have only been available on CP/M-86, not CP/M-80. Otherwise, ANSI files like that would have only displayed correctly on MS-DOS with ANSI.SYS loaded. BTW the emulated graphics card supports loading different character glyphs, so it's totally possible to load a "ye olde" fancy character set and play Zork with it, as should be done.
> The screenshots you've posted definitely look interesting to poke around with. Do the keys press as you type? :D
Not really, the hand animations flail around as you type and it looks kind of funny. It's something I'd like to improve, maybe with three keyboard proficency levels, hunt-and-peck, touch typing, and something in between.
Like, what's the point of an "operating system UI" in a Linux desktop environment?
But then, I also don't get the point of doing that in some game engine called Unity.
I mean, is that a viable way to do a desktop?
Maybe it's just satire about flashy but useless eye candy.
When you're running lots of VMs, you end up using as little RAM as possible. It used to bug the hell out of me that Whonix came with KDE. Now finally they switched to XFCE. My Debian VMs get 1-2GB, and some script-laden sites can freeze them.
The linked one is particularly polished; it would have taken ages to implement all those little details.
[1] https://store.steampowered.com/app/417860/Emily_is_Away/
There's several examples - Simulacra, Emily was Away, Hypnospace Outlaw - that use the interface of an (imaginary) computer as their primary framing device.
Or it could be useful in an immersive-sim type game where there happen to be computers you can interact with; you could immediately see the applications in some kind of hacking-themed game.
So yeah, I get it. Of course there'd be computers in games.
But once you have an OS in a game, why not just run a VM? Or would that use too many resources?
What you seem to want is complexity.
Maybe buttons should look different from non-clickable icons. That requires some complexity.
Flatness to the current point of minimalism is, to me, very taxing and complex. Things blend together so much it's hard to tell where one UI element begins and another one ends. I frequently misclick in Windows 10/Office 365 even though I've used it for years now, simply because the flatness makes me misinterpret the layout and function of the UI.
I don't even mind skeuomorphism, I quite like it, but it's just bullheaded-error that has people claiming that it's simpler than flat design.
Complexity isn't a sin or something.
I liked the 3Dness of the buttons in Windows 95-98.
You knew if something was clickable right away.
I have `comment fatigue` over flat design complaints.
Why would you like a change? So you want to see the common UIs constantly redesigned every few years?
So you can have the UI of your dreams, or at least a UI which is honestly different from what you're railing against, if you just open your eyes a little and see beyond the defaults.
Rip it apart, integrate into your system, be happy. Maybe do it in a generalized way and "show HN". But why? It is out there, more or less ready to use.
But to be honest, i think this nostalgy is overrated. It is not good, just what you have been used to for a long time. Because you had no other options, except of using alternative windows shells which broke with every update, and most users shied away from such deep modding anyways.
Personally i can't stand the XP look, but can live with "classic" which is based on that Windows2000/W98 style. But it is too dark! And i dislike some of the common Icons and Widgets.
Anyways, i'm using something "Material" since about 20 years now, with lighter color palettes, but not that low contrast stuff which is so common now. Very small padding, and small but visible borders. You can tune and modify that into blissful oblivion, and have it applied across QT3/4/5 and GTK2/3.
It's up to you.
Or choose just another Distro because of the nice desktop backround!1!!
(Hop! Hop! Hop!)
This is a remake of Project Glass, which is a simulated operating system UI, this time implemented in Unity. It's not a full OS, but every simulated app and widget inside is fully functional.
There is currently only a Windows demo [1] available, and he's undecided whether he'll release on Github or not.
[1] https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p3AACMd6KuRnHctsq42uJfMq3Bw...
> About Project Glass:
> Glass is a simulated operating system user interface (UI) project and it is being made with Unity 2018.4. It is not a real OS, although everything in the package is functional and can be changed easily. This is basically a remake of the original project which was released 2 years ago. If you're wondering why I'm working on this project, you can search for Simulacra, Welcome to the Game or Emily is Away and you'll get the idea (plus it's fun). You can even count GTA for its phones and browser. This project is much much bigger than the examples though.
> If you want, you can try it yourself by downloading this Windows demo: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p3AACMd6KuRnHctsq42uJfMq3Bw...
> 60fps showcase: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu_2e0LebNY
For years we've been optimizing battery life, but now that mobile devices can run for 8-10 hours or more on a single charge, perhaps we should reconsider spending more of the power budget (and implementation effort) on usability.
On a side note, it baffles me that devices like the PS4 that are amazingly responsive during gameplay have extremely clunky and unresponsive system GUIs. Can't we get some smart game programmers to rewrite the PS4 system GUI to make it fast and responsive?
Please don't. I would like to see you get rewarded for your hard work. Screw the parasites.
Their new UI seems to be doing its job, but I wonder if the decline in thread quality was worth it.
You should visit /r/cscareerquestions and sort by New some time. Many of the younger posters have some wild expectations about CS careers, compensation, and the workplace.
90% of the young people I interview, hire, and work with are wonderful these days. However, a small minority arrive with unchecked entitlement and bizarre expectations, and I think sites like Reddit and Twitter are to blame.
I think there's a small subset of people who grew up watching that "Fuck you, pay me" video on YouTube, combined with a hot job market and an economy that hasn't seen a recession in their adult years. Combine that with stories of Google engineers making $200K+, and you end up with a small minority of developers with an extreme sense of entitlement.
I've seen developers try to invoice companies for time spent in on-site interviews, junior developers who couldn't pass basic FizzBuzz-level coding challenges demanding $250K compensation, and a surprising number of /r/cscareerquestions threads justifying "ghosting" your employer. Not to mention the meltdowns that happen when people get put on performance improvement programs. And of course, the never ending comments encouraging people to sue their employers for trivial things.
Reddit has some gems, but it's a breeding ground for keyboard warriors. Upvotes tend to follow what people want to hear rather than the best advice. It's easy to be an internet tough guy, but a lot of that grumpiness and entitlement breaks down when they meet the real world.
I think UI frameworks should take more from game engines, which I think has happened over the last 2 decades, albeit slowly. My best examples of it is probably currently QtQuick, which builds completely on OpenGL and uses a bunch of game engine terminology in its documentation - but I have also found that it's possible and not too hard to make working application mockups using Godot.
If this could run on Linux and have support for running arbitrary x11 apps then it would be very interesting! I don't have a lot of personal knowledge about Unity3d, but I do hope the creator puts this up on github or something. I'd love to take a closer look.
And yes, with a bit of hacking you can do silly things like put physics on the windows and shoot holes in them. It won't get you close to what is in that Unity demo though. That would require re-designing all the apps. In my experience it's a massive pain in the ass to get eye-candy like that working correctly for arbitrary UIs and it's not worth the effort for most apps.
Yes that's what I figured. For sure not what it's designed to do as of yet, but if that gap could be bridged in a practical way then this seems like a good head start.
There is a reason that UIs don't look like this. The transparency alone is a major issue for usability, accessibility, and productivity.
It's an interesting project. I wish this person would have pushed themselves to think of new paradigms, rather than trying to use more effects to very staid looking interaction design concepts.
As in, tell me something I don't know - I'll be able to believe [in] that much more effectively than a revamp of some old dead thing I've been staring at boredly for the past X amount of time.
Looks pretty slick though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fsn_(file_manager)
EDIT: Come to think about it... back then, the tech was probably just about mature enough to make such a thing just about possible, certainly today it can beautifully be done, and can maybe even more efficient (for the user/work, not hardware) than classic terminal/GUI approaches. I've never used a third party file explorer, apart maybe from WinSCP, but what sounded ridiculous could actually be pretty genius.
Anyone here on a 3d filesystem explorer?
It's sad that a kid can make this with Unity3D, probably on his/her free time, and Microsoft with all its billions is not capable of producing a good UI for Windows.
- Music player without connection to the real world (spotify/youtube)
- Notes app without connection to the real world (the file system/other platforms)
- Messages app without connection to the real world (sms / messenger / whatsapp / etc etc)
- Photos app without connection to the real world (some kind of cloud synced file system)
- Notifications ... I really still have not found a use for them, except for IM on my phone
Stop bundling these things :( It looks nice, but the real world use is so limited. Focus on really enabling other stuff instead
Also, well, notes without filesystem access feels really useless, we can agree on that one.
It's intended for use inside of computer games; whether for simulation of using computers inside the game-world, or for games where the framing device is a (simulated) desktop interface.
In which case, the "limited real world use" is hardly a flaw!
So that's one of many reasons practical OSes don't do their UIs with GPU shaders when they can otherwise get away with less.
But otherwise most operating systems do run in full GPU mode all the time. The true-mobile ones, so iOS & Android, are almost always using dedicated hardware to handle composition without spinning up the GPU (although both use the GPU to render, so whenever something does change it's immediately back on the GPU), but "desktop" ones are generally always doing GPU composition as long as the display is on. With some hand-wavy exceptions to that primarily for video layers in select circumstances with proper hardware support.
Whether apps make use of these capabilities are another question. It's pretty easy to get lazy and blat out the whole window every time, when you know the GPU can handle the pixel bandwidth, and things like imgui explicitly make this tradeoff to keep logic simple.
I presume these are inside the GPU die, though? Probably near the display controller logic?
The mobile ones though are pretty good, though. They can do like ~6 composition layers with alpha blending, cropping, rotation, and apply a color matrix for display calibration. All in the dedicated HWC silicon, GPU can be powered off (or doing something else like rendering a game)
- Redrawing entire application windows every time something gets moved around a bit and something gets a paint event is also higher load than necessary
- Drawing things that won't change every frame into textures (not shaders), and then compositing those textures together on every frame, is by far the most efficient approach today, on all platforms
I am genuinely interested to hear the definition of "less" that you refer to. It's possible some piece of assumed context is being lost in translation.
Not really true. It's a lot more efficient to draw quite a few things from scratch than it is to use a cache texture. Texture composition requires a lot of memory bandwidth, which tends to be a rather constrained resource. It is very effective to do things like put each window in its own texture, yes. Within a given window using caching textures tends to be a net-loss, though.
Here is something I am coding with Dear ImGui:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbZsE7ACXrw
Even on an old MacBook, it keeps running at 60 FPS.
[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2020/02/09/windows-...
Not sure why it's borked for you...
This is the first that I'm hearing of this. That is absolutely sick.
Kind of like the underpinning concept of AppleScript and app dictionaries, awesome tech and concepts, but it’s sad to see the promise of the extensible, composable desktop slowly dying.
But my recollection is that it's fine as a search feature, and not that great as a launcher— if you just blindly type a prefix and press enter (as you can on Windows or Ubuntu), you end up launching a window of extended search results. Maybe I was doing it wrong somehow, but whenever I used Spotlight to search for an app, I needed to type it in, wait for the search to completely resolve, and then use the mouse to select and launch the application out of the results.
I can't seem to figure out how to effectively navigate the file system on MacOS without resorting to the terminal. I routinely have trouble locating mounted file systems, can't figure out how to type in a specific path I want to go to, etc. These things are trivial on Windows, but seem not to be possible on MacOS. I'll give it the benefit of the doubt and assume that I'm just too used to Windows to discover this functionality, but it's a real PITA.
Wish this was a bit more discoverable on MacOS - I think that's what windows' file explorer is particularly good at. Though, I'm almost certainly biased.
See also: compilers, libraries, ORMs, autotools, Docker, ... We as an industry go to extreme lengths to work around crap that’s incompatible for no good reason.
I think a bunch of animations shown in this piece are over the top. But quick animations can help immensely with usability. The best ones are so subtle that most people don't even notice. Interestingly, lots of game UIs have subtle animations, I guess because they are easy to do. OSX, iOS and even Android have animations _everywhere_, but they barely register unless you are looking for them (exception for windows getting minimized, but that does serve a function).
> I'm not convinced that we've seen any meaningful advance in OS UI design since Windows 95.
If that's the bar, then we haven't seen any meaningful advancements ever since the Xerox PARC.
And in Win 95 you still could choose all colors by yourself. Now you can say bright or dark an almost no app listen to it.
No, it was because the animation was blocking.
Yeah, probably so. It just so happens that I built my first PC sometime around 1994 or 95 so Windows 95 is the first graphical OS that I can personally remember.
I'm not convinced of this, humans come with some impressive visual diffing hardware and we rely on this to detect animations in the first place. We also know that the more animation going on the more likely we are to miss things.
We also seem to be stuck in the notion of animations happening before something is shown, a slide in or a fade in or something like that. If animations are really necessary why can't the action be instant with a subtle post animation to highlight what's changed?
Users also started demanding "smoothness" over speed, smoothness simply being how consistently the UI interactions behaved. On Android I remember people would complain it was laggy compared to iOS, I think part of this reason was because of animation speeds. Increasing animation speeds allows you to make your interface more consistently slow.
I think animations are fine when they don't increase the time until I can do the next thing. If something takes around 1s to load and the UI shows an animation during that time, I am okay with that and I think it actually enhances the experience. But if something takes only 1ms and the designers display a 1s animation blocking me from doing the next thing until the animation has played then that is a major annoyance.
They provide a sense of spatialisation and context. e.g minimising a window with an animation (such as the Genie effect, but even earlier, cruder ones) helps in understanding where it went and finding it back instead of having it just vanish. Over time the user builds a model of how it operates by observing such cues. To an advanced user it makes no sense because one already understands that, so the animation becomes an inconvenient delay.
Some animations though, are just there for the heck of it, and don’t help (or even confuse) the user. They’re like the high contrast demo mode on TV, aside for being perceptually satisfying, they carry no meaning, and are actively revolting by their cognitive dissonance to users that already have a understanding of interaction models, but you’d be hard pressed to explain that to users that don’t have that understanding.
I think this particular example could use some fine tuning but for the most part does a pretty killer job of delivering low latency effects with consistent easing.
Ok, ok, I'm being dumb. And yeah, I tend to agree, but as a counterpoint: sometimes it's also just cool to have cool stuff. There is certainly a modernist fetish for superminimalism – HN being a locally favored example of a great social media website with no unnecessary frills – but I think your qualifier "serve a clear purpose" is not objective enough to be a good rule. What you and I think is a clear purpose are bound to be very different. I think a fade in/scaling animation for windows to appear and disappear is a better experience than just flickering them on and off – I think the clear purpose there is that it's cognitively less demanding when a window appears over the course of 200ms rather than 1ms. But hey, that's me.
What is the "clear purpose" of MacOS UI to have rounded corners, or the status bar to be translucent, or for the "genie" effect of minimizing an app. The truth is, animations have almost zero impact on the usability of an app or experience and only add to the perception of quality. Much like contrast stitching on the leather seat of your BMW, the reason it's there is simply because people think it's kinda nice to have and doesn't hurt anyone. Otherwise the only pants we'd be able to buy would be cargo pants... and no one likes cargo pants.
It's OK for stuff to exist that is "just neat".
Nothing comes for free and if you're optimizing for "just neat" then you're paying in usability.
I don't know if this helps or hurts your point, but I do in fact also hate graphical T's. All of my T-shirts are solid colors and most of them are black.
>What is the "clear purpose" of MacOS UI to have rounded corners, or the status bar to be translucent, or for the "genie" effect of minimizing an app.
Thankfully I don't have to use macOS very often, but I don't think any of those serve a purpose and they constantly (but mildly) annoy me when I do have to boot up my mac. The minimization effect is important, but it should still be fast.
Of course, this can be eliminated in many cases, including where the change is an immediate reaction to user input, since we would then expect the change, and would not miss it.
Any time someone's design blog starts talking about how an animation makes people feel, it's time to run screaming.
I completely agree there. There have been some small improvements — XP added recent items to the Start Menu, Vista added search to the Start Menu, 7 improved the taskbar somewhat. But overall, things are still built on what 95 established, and the only overhaul since that was actually released (Windows 8) was a clear regression and Microsoft was forced to revert much of it.
Unfortunately though, while the 95-era concepts are still around, the presentation of them is an inconsistent mess now. Windows 10 is full of different UI stylings that look horrible and make the system confusing. I often suspect that people only know how to use “modern” flat UI through sheer inertia, because it's close enough to the old skeumorphic UI that what people learned back then is still useful. But how do new starters figure out what the shapes and colours mean? They don't convey meaning any more.
Windows 10 added ads.
This reminds me of being a kid, and always having the "hacker" mentality. Use whatever you have available to make something awesome.
I remember having my first "computer" based project around 2001 for school. We had to create some kind of presentation "using any tool" available to us on our home computer (or available in the school library).
I opted to create my presentation using RPG Maker 2000. It had animations, sound effects, and even a little quiz at the end. I handed the project in to the teacher on a 1.44MB floppy* drive containing only the compiled windows binary.
The teacher loved it and placed me in a regional school advanced IT program where I was first introduced to QBASIC.
Not sure if this is supposed to be a happy end or not.
Cool story!
Funny thing was, I already knew how to program (in terms of breaking problems down and using components to model data - probably from building games in RPG Maker), I just had never been shown a programming language. It was a "AHA!" moment.
I honestly think it's more interesting as:
- A demonstration of what's possible within Unity (it's extremely impressive, because Unity's built-in GUI system is pretty terrible and it's clear that there's some level of composability, etc. to the UI system being demonstrated)
- An experiment in creating a totally virtual, cross-platform (gorgeous) desktop environment within a single app that could be trivially run on any OS
But of course it's still a long way from the latter, if someone even wanted to take it that direction
My take on your comment is that the problem of electron is that it uses HTML.
Super simple, zero asset electron app? ~300MB
Relatively complicated binary created with unity that includes high resolution textures, models and sounds? 35MB.
So far, everything I've used electron for has had good enough performance though.